Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 1: To ask the Taoiseach if all of the recommendations made in the Sullivan report, following the A case have been implemented in the Attorney General's office; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19884/07]

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 2: To ask the Taoiseach the number of reports submitted to date by the three person panel of experts who were appointed in the aftermath of the A case to advise upon and review, twice yearly, risk management procedures within the Office of the Attorney General; the recommendations made in the reports; if it is intended to publish these reports; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19885/07]

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 3: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the recommendations of the Sullivan report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22410/07]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 4: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on changes in the Attorney General's office in view of the A case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25356/07]

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, together.

In reply to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 1 to 8, inclusive, on 1 November 2006, I stated substantial progress had been made in implementing the recommendations of the Sullivan report. Further progress has been made since. Implementation of the recommendations of the report formed part of the Attorney General office's action plan under the Towards 2016 performance verification process and progress reported to the Civil Service performance verification group, with the progress reports published on the office's website.

Specific developments in implementing the Sullivan report include a review by a number of advisory counsel of risk management procedures for sensitive cases within the advisory groups regular legal MAC meetings since 11 October 2006; three reports to the Government on sensitive and constitutional cases since October 2006; six secondments of advisory counsel grade III made to Departments and more recruited by the Office of the Attorney General for training prior to secondment; discussions have advanced between the Office of the Attorney General and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions about the transfer of responsibility for fisheries prosecution to the latter office; and the transfer of administration of the Attorney General's scheme to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform from 1 February this year.

The three-person panel of external experts, risk management group, appointed in June 2006 by the Attorney General made their initial report on 17 July this year. As it is an initial report, it is not intended to publish it. The report details 11 key findings and related recommendations arising from their review and examination of systems. The recommendations revolve around issues of overview of sensitive cases, arrangements to identify and monitor sensitive cases, file maintenance and management, technology supports and diary alert systems, with collaboration and notification arrangements across the office. The recommendations have been or are being implemented. Further consultation with the group will take place as necessary. In its 2007 annual report, to be published early in 2008, the Office of the Attorney General will report further on the implementation of the Sullivan report, as well as report progress to the Civil Service performance verification group.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Following the publication of the Sullivan report, the Taoiseach informed the House he would appoint a special rapporteur on child protection who, among other matters, would keep under review and audit legal developments for the protection of children. Two people were appointed to carry out that function. One of the commitments given by the Taoiseach at the time was that they would prepare a report annually setting out the details of their work, which would be submitted to the Dáil and Seanad for debate. No such report has been submitted. Therefore, we have not had an opportunity to debate the issue. Have the rapporteurs made a report? If so, when will it be laid before the House?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The rapporteurs are in place and have been actively involved. References were made in the Attorney General's annual report and, as I said, there will also be an update early next year. If the decision was that they were to present a report to the House, I will have to check that matter because I cannot recall seeing a published report, but perhaps I am wrong. However, the rapporteurs are in place and have been actively involved but I am not certain whether they presented a report.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The A case was very controversial at the time and on 7 June last year the Taoiseach made a commitment that a special rapporteur for child protection would be appointed. My understanding from the Oireachtas Library yesterday is that the report has not been presented. A recommendation for the establishment of a legal MAC which the Attorney General would attend was also made. Has it been established? If so, how often does it meet?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, it has operated since October 2006 and all relevant issues in the Attorney General's office are discussed. The process is that cases of importance are brought to it. While hundreds of cases challenging legislation or statutory instruments are current at any one time, the key cases, as per the Sullivan report, are brought forward to the legal MAC. I understand the Government receives a report from it on cases of importance not quarterly but three times a year. As Deputy Gilmore is aware, 19 measures were adopted from the Sullivan report to minimise the risk of a recurrence of that serious event. Most of those measures related to enhanced risk assessment procedures, including external review of risk assessment procedures, and at group level assigning responsibility for risk assessment to a member of each group in respect of cases being processed by it. They report under new management procedures, including the establishment of the legal MAC which the Deputy mentioned, to focus on the current legal issues. The idea for the establishment of the legal MAC was to concentrate not on the administrative but on the legal issues. The administrative issues are clearly being dealt with in the normal way by the Secretary General of the Attorney General's office. The legal MAC was set up to concentrate on the legal issues coming forward from the examination of the procedures, and this is happening.

There was also to be further enhancement of the information communications technology system, including the provision of a risk register at case level, so that the case handler would be prompted to assess the risks in the opening of a case and at suitable checkpoints. I understand that all these issues are being undertaken.

I asked if all cases are brought to the legal MAC and, in response to Deputy Gilmore's question, not all cases are brought to it. Currently there are 340 cases of constitutional actions against the State. Therefore, not every case is brought to the legal MAC, only the cases it is believed merit that consideration where challenges have been made either to constitutional Acts of the Oireachtas or otherwise. I thought the idea was that every case would come before it, but I want to be clear about that. I checked the number of current cases and given the number it would not be possible for them all to come before it. The main cases of the 340 current cases would be brought forward to the legal MAC.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I believe there were 19 recommendations in the Sullivan report. How many of them have been implemented? What is the timescale for their full implementation?

Is the Taoiseach satisfied that a similar situation will not arise again? I thought the then Attorney General, Rory Brady, was to be informed at certain stages, which did not happen. Is the Taoiseach satisfied that will not arise again?

As the Taoiseach is aware, there were a number of cases where a statutory rape charge was made against a number of individuals. Those charges were dropped because the charge in that context was unconstitutional and another charge was put against them. What is the position regarding those persons or the charges of statutory rape, which were put against those individuals but which were not pursued in the courts because of the unconstitutionality of the charge? Does the Taoiseach have any information on that? How many of those cases are involved at the moment?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To the best of my knowledge, there was only a small number of those cases. I do not have the information on them but I understand most of them were brought back in under different clauses and they all took effect. It is a number of months since I was briefed on it but, to the best of my knowledge, I do not believe there were any difficulties with them.

I understand all the procedures have been brought in. As Members will recall at that time the case was properly handled and efficiently dealt with but in terms of risk management it was not brought to the attention of the Attorney General. There were seven phases where it should have been brought to his attention but that was only done in the first phase, which was the appointment of the legal counsel.

I would like to be able to say to Deputy Kenny I would be absolutely confident nothing like that could happen again. I was watching, as I am sure was the Deputy, what was happening in the UK overnight when the whole files of a system were put in the post.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach has not done that yet.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would be a little wary to say nothing like that could ever happen.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach never had the files. He cannot remember where they are.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach never had the files in the first place. This file covered 25 million people.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Somebody actually resigned there.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If one puts a file covering 25 million people in the post and does not register it, what does one expect? We never know what might be happening at any time. That is the point I am making.

Seriously, all these matters have been followed through. When I checked the position regarding the legal MAC and the number of cases current at any one time, I presumed that I would have been told there were, say, ten cases of actions against either statutory instruments or legislation of this House. When I was briefed on this matter last week, I saw from the briefing notes there are currently 340 cases. The huge volume of cases concerns me. Each of these cases concerns a constitutional action taken against the State, either constitutional actions against statutes that we put in place or statutory instruments. That number of cases shows the complexity of the work in that office and they account for only part of the work.

When dealing with these questions, I checked back to the last round of difficulties we had in 1994 to 1995 and noted the figures then as against now. The volume of litigation currently is extraordinary. I would be naive to say that it will cease. It puts enormous pressure on the system. The recommendations in the 1995 report were fully implemented and the then Attorney General, Dermot Gleeson, to his credit, undertook the first overhaul of that office and subsequent office holders have continued on that work and brought in a huge range of procedures. The volume of work and pressure in that office is enormous, given the volume of litigation. That is proper and people are entitled to take such actions, but the volume of work is high. Even though we have all these procedures in place, the number of cases is a concern. We have protocols as to how these cases are handled but there is the issue of sheer volume of cases in the Attorney General's office, the Chief State Solicitor's Office and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. We have implemented fully the recommendations of the Nally report, we have resolved the industrial relations and brought in the extra staff recommended. A large number of staff are now working in the office but the volume of cases is huge.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On the related matter of the proposed referendum on children's rights, will the Taoiseach indicate when that might take place? I understand that the committee dealing with the referendum is about to be established and it will have to report within its terms of reference. I understand that included in that is a projected four-month timeframe for responding. Will the Taoiseach confirm that is the case? Given that we will then have to go through the normal process of the Dáil and Seanad address of the enabling legislation in regard to the amendment to the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill, does the Taoiseach anticipate that there will be sufficient time to allow for that proposed referendum to be held on the same day as the expected referendum on the Lisbon treaty? Is it his intent to hold both on the same day or is he anticipating the latter coming first and a referendum on children's rights being held later in 2008?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy will appreciate that is not totally within my control. We will have to try to resolve that in the House as well. I will give the Deputy my view and the Government's view on this. We gave a commitment last spring that we would have a children's rights referendum within a year. I would like to try to honour that. We have set up a committee with terms of reference. I understand it has come to a compromise that it will be five months before we can finalise it and that would put it back to the end of April. The Minister of State, Deputy Brendan Smith, briefed me on this yesterday. Then, there has to be a referendum Bill and in regard to the summer, that would make matters very tight. Regardless of the other referendum, it would be very unlikely that we would have two referendums in one year or even within any foreseeable timeframe. If this is not held in tandem with the other referendum next year, then it will be pushed back. In the event, that would be unfair to the NGOs who are being pressed on this. I gave a commitment two years ago that we would deal with this issue.

As the Deputy knows, we have to deal with the other issue in 2008, albeit on no particular date. I should like to see the work being undertaken by the all-party committee dealing with the constitutional amendment on children completed as speedily as possible, so that the two referendums may be held at the same time. Our practice here has been to try to reach agreement in so far as we can on the holding of referendums. It would be preferable to hold them together, if we can.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have a brief supplementary for the Taoiseach. I gather from his response that he would like to see both referendums taking place on the one day, and that makes eminent sense because, hopefully, it would maximise participation. Is he concerned, however, given the timeframes that I have outlined in my original question, that the prospects of this being achieved are unlikely, because of constraints of time both as regards the new committee and in the context of whatever enabling legislation must be processed through both Houses of the Oireachtas? I am concerned and would like the Taoiseach to elaborate further since his response indicates they are unlikely to be held together on the same day. Given the pattern of referendum intervals, can he say whether there could be an inordinate delay before the children's referendum is placed before the people? Can he be somewhat more specific and give the House a further sense of his current understanding of the situation and what steps he believes may be taken to accommodate both referendums at the earliest opportunity, preferably on the one day?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is a fair summary of what I stated. If we are to hold the two referendums together, it means the work has to be done as speedily as possible. It seems to me a large amount of work has been done and the Minister of State, Deputy Smith, advises me that the committee will take until the end of April. Then a referendum Bill will have to be passed, but it is really a matter of how to schedule the timetable. If that is not done, then the commitment of every party leader in the House will have been broken, not just mine, that this issue would be dealt with within a year. I do not believe the NGOs, which comprise a large number of organisations from all over the country, would be upset if that commitment was broken by a few months. However, it would be a different position if it were to be broken by a few years, and that is not desirable. I shall do everything I can, but I need the co-operation of everybody to try to deal with these two issues together. The fact is that we have given a commitment for one to be finished around Easter, and that is not possible. The other we have to deal with in 2008, because of the EU implications. Some degree of effort is therefore required from the children's committee, which I know has just started work in this regard, as well as from the House, to deal with the two issues. It would be better if we could deal with them together.

Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach mentioned that a startlingly high number of constitutional actions are under way in any year. Do his briefing notes have further information in this regard? He mentioned a figure of 340 that are currently in hand. What percentage of these cases actually come to trial? More important, perhaps, how many successfully identify a breach of the Constitution in any year as regards either primary or secondary legislation?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The answer to the last question is that the percentage is tiny, but that does not impede the effort. I do not have a breakdown. To be honest, I was surprised there were that many cases through the legal MAC. I had not realised the number was that high, but only a small percentage of cases are ever successful. A fair number of them are pushed all the way, however. The Deputy has been in the House as long as I have and knows there is an ever-growing industry, if that is the word, reviewing the legislation on statutory instruments and formulating challenges around particular groups. That seems to grow exponentially every year.